Democrats Disown Thomas Jefferson

[Contumacious]

Democrats don't like Jefferson and Jackson anymore

August 12, 2015




Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson have long been claimed as early defining figures in the history of the Democratic Party, but they may soon slip off their pedestals: Four state branches of the DNC have already renamed their annual Jefferson-Jackson Dinner events to avoid now-unwanted historical associations, and at least five other state parties are considering doing the same

The decision "confirms that our party believes it is important to change the name of the dinner to align with the values of our modern-day Democratic Party: inclusiveness, diversity and equality," said Andy McGuire, chair of the Iowa Democratic Party, the latest group to make the switch. Both presidents owned slaves, and Jackson also backed the Indian Removal Act and the infamous Trail of Tears.


Well , it makes sense.

Thomas Jefferson supported a free Constitutional Republic

The modern day democrats are socialists/fascists/state supremacists - they support the gargantuan welfare/warfare police state. So they should align themselves with Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin. Hugo Vhavez, .

 

[Pogo]

The Democratic Party didn't exist in Jefferson's time. That started with Jackson, after Jefferson was already dead.

Jefferson/Madison had a "Democratic-Republican" Party, which has no relation to either the contemporary Democratic or Republican party. Both of them simply recycled the terms.

 

[Mac1958]

In order to avoid looking like hypocrites, the PC Police will have to keep disavowing and banning all kinds of things and people from this nation's history.

It'll be funny watching them running around, pretending to be "offended" by every last freakin' thing, making themselves "feel" like they're actually improving something.

.

 

[Stephanie]

This party has become no better than ISIS. I don't know why they just don't blow up the statues. show your true colors

 

[Contumacious]

The Democratic Party didn't exist in Jefferson's time. That started with Jackson, after Jefferson was already dead.

Jefferson/Madison had a "Democratic-Republican" Party, which has no relation to either the contemporary Democratic or Republican party. Both of them simply recycled the terms.

So? The principles are the same. Supremacy of the individual - NOT OF THE STATE.

 

[Pogo]

The Democratic Party didn't exist in Jefferson's time. That started with Jackson, after Jefferson was already dead.

Jefferson/Madison had a "Democratic-Republican" Party, which has no relation to either the contemporary Democratic or Republican party. Both of them simply recycled the terms.

So? The principles are the same. Supremacy of the individual - NOT OF THE STATE.

SO, your OP declared that "Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson have long been claimed as early defining figures in the history of the Democratic Party".

And that's bullshit, and you just got schooled on it.

There's no such thing as "supremacy of the individual" unless you're an anarchist.

 

[Contumacious]

The Democratic Party didn't exist in Jefferson's time. That started with Jackson, after Jefferson was already dead.

Jefferson/Madison had a "Democratic-Republican" Party, which has no relation to either the contemporary Democratic or Republican party. Both of them simply recycled the terms.

So? The principles are the same. Supremacy of the individual - NOT OF THE STATE.

SO, your OP declared that "Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson have long been claimed as early defining figures in the history of the Democratic Party".

And that's bullshit, and you just got schooled on it.

There's no such thing as "supremacy of the individual" unless you're an anarchist.

There is no such thing as "supremacy of the state" unless you are a fascist/socialist.

The historical information before them was that governments throughout the ages injured and killed their citizens.

When the fuck are you going to get schooled on that?!>!?!?!?

 

[Pogo]

The Democratic Party didn't exist in Jefferson's time. That started with Jackson, after Jefferson was already dead.

Jefferson/Madison had a "Democratic-Republican" Party, which has no relation to either the contemporary Democratic or Republican party. Both of them simply recycled the terms.

So? The principles are the same. Supremacy of the individual - NOT OF THE STATE.

SO, your OP declared that "Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson have long been claimed as early defining figures in the history of the Democratic Party".

And that's bullshit, and you just got schooled on it.

There's no such thing as "supremacy of the individual" unless you're an anarchist.

There is no such thing as "supremacy of the state" unless you are a fascist/socialist.

The historical information before them was that governments throughout the ages injured and killed their citizens.

When the fuck are you going to get schooled on that?!>!?!?!?

Calm down little man. I never brought up any "supremacy of the state". YOU did.

Bottom line is still that your ignorance of your own history got called out for what it is. Run along now, preferably in the direction of a history book.

 

[Contumacious]

The Democratic Party didn't exist in Jefferson's time. That started with Jackson, after Jefferson was already dead.

Jefferson/Madison had a "Democratic-Republican" Party, which has no relation to either the contemporary Democratic or Republican party. Both of them simply recycled the terms.

So? The principles are the same. Supremacy of the individual - NOT OF THE STATE.

SO, your OP declared that "Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson have long been claimed as early defining figures in the history of the Democratic Party".

And that's bullshit, and you just got schooled on it.

There's no such thing as "supremacy of the individual" unless you're an anarchist.

There is no such thing as "supremacy of the state" unless you are a fascist/socialist.

The historical information before them was that governments throughout the ages injured and killed their citizens.

When the fuck are you going to get schooled on that?!>!?!?!?

Calm down little man. I never brought up any "supremacy of the state". YOU did.

Bottom line is still that your ignorance of your own history got called out for what it is. Run along now, preferably in the direction of a history book.

MR. DINGLE BERRY , SIR:

IF THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT SUPREME THEN THE STATE IS.


RUN ALONG NOW, PREFERABLY TOWARDS A DEDUCTIVE LOGIC BOOK.


.

 

[MACAULAY]

All Jeffersonians are glad to see these ridiculous Socialists distancing themselves from this very great American...picked at the turn of the millineum as the most influential American ever...and one of the twenty most influential of the last 1000 years.

The Nazis didn't like Jefferson, the Faciasts in Italy didn't, nor the Bosheviks in Russia, neither the Ayatollahs in Iran.

Nutjobs don't like Jefferson...and today's Democrat is a nut-job.

 

[Pogo]

The Democratic Party didn't exist in Jefferson's time. That started with Jackson, after Jefferson was already dead.

Jefferson/Madison had a "Democratic-Republican" Party, which has no relation to either the contemporary Democratic or Republican party. Both of them simply recycled the terms.

So? The principles are the same. Supremacy of the individual - NOT OF THE STATE.

SO, your OP declared that "Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson have long been claimed as early defining figures in the history of the Democratic Party".

And that's bullshit, and you just got schooled on it.

There's no such thing as "supremacy of the individual" unless you're an anarchist.

There is no such thing as "supremacy of the state" unless you are a fascist/socialist.

The historical information before them was that governments throughout the ages injured and killed their citizens.

When the fuck are you going to get schooled on that?!>!?!?!?

Calm down little man. I never brought up any "supremacy of the state". YOU did.

Bottom line is still that your ignorance of your own history got called out for what it is. Run along now, preferably in the direction of a history book.

MR. DINGLE BERRY , SIR:

IF THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT SUPREME THEN THE STATE IS.


RUN ALONG NOW, PREFERABLY TOWARDS A DEDUCTIVE LOGIC BOOK.

Your logical fallacy is:

False Dilemma.
And strawman too.

I know all this shit, Pinkie. Ask me anything.

 

[Contumacious]

So? The principles are the same. Supremacy of the individual - NOT OF THE STATE.

SO, your OP declared that "Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson have long been claimed as early defining figures in the history of the Democratic Party".

And that's bullshit, and you just got schooled on it.

There's no such thing as "supremacy of the individual" unless you're an anarchist.

There is no such thing as "supremacy of the state" unless you are a fascist/socialist.

The historical information before them was that governments throughout the ages injured and killed their citizens.

When the fuck are you going to get schooled on that?!>!?!?!?

Calm down little man. I never brought up any "supremacy of the state". YOU did.

Bottom line is still that your ignorance of your own history got called out for what it is. Run along now, preferably in the direction of a history book.

MR. DINGLE BERRY , SIR:

IF THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT SUPREME THEN THE STATE IS.


RUN ALONG NOW, PREFERABLY TOWARDS A DEDUCTIVE LOGIC BOOK.

Your logical fallacy is:

False Dilemma.
And strawman too.

I know all this shit, Pinkie. Ask me anything.

MR. DINGLE BERRY , SIR:

IF THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT SUPREME THEN THE STATE IS.


RUN ALONG NOW, PREFERABLY TOWARDS A DEDUCTIVE LOGIC BOOK.

 

[Pogo]

SO, your OP declared that "Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson have long been claimed as early defining figures in the history of the Democratic Party".

And that's bullshit, and you just got schooled on it.

There's no such thing as "supremacy of the individual" unless you're an anarchist.

There is no such thing as "supremacy of the state" unless you are a fascist/socialist.

The historical information before them was that governments throughout the ages injured and killed their citizens.

When the fuck are you going to get schooled on that?!>!?!?!?

Calm down little man. I never brought up any "supremacy of the state". YOU did.

Bottom line is still that your ignorance of your own history got called out for what it is. Run along now, preferably in the direction of a history book.

MR. DINGLE BERRY , SIR:

IF THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT SUPREME THEN THE STATE IS.


RUN ALONG NOW, PREFERABLY TOWARDS A DEDUCTIVE LOGIC BOOK.

Your logical fallacy is:

False Dilemma.
And strawman too.

I know all this shit, Pinkie. Ask me anything.

MR. DINGLE BERRY , SIR:

IF THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT SUPREME THEN THE STATE IS.


RUN ALONG NOW, PREFERABLY TOWARDS A DEDUCTIVE LOGIC BOOK.

You appear to have many "supremacy" obsessions, Pinkie. Not sure what that means.

Your fallacy is: False Dilemma Repeated

(also known as: false dichotomy*, the either-or fallacy, either-or reasoning, fallacy of false choice, fallacy of false alternatives, black-and-white thinking, the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, bifurcation, excluded middle, no middle ground, polarization)

Description: When only two choices are presented yet more exist, or a spectrum of possible choices exists between two extremes. False dilemmas are usually characterized by “either this or that” language, but can also be characterized by omissions of choices.

Logical Form:

Either X or Y is true.


Example (two choices):

You are either with God, or against him.

Explanation: As Obi Wan Kenobi so eloquently puts it in Star Wars episode III, “Only a Sith deals in absolutes!” There are also those who simply don’t believe there is a God to be either with or against.
(also known as: false dichotomy*, the either-or fallacy, either-or reasoning, fallacy of false choice, fallacy of false alternatives, black-and-white thinking, the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, bifurcation, excluded middle, no middle ground, polarization)​

 

[Katzndogz]

Today's democrats have a big gripe against the Declaration of Independence. It stands to reason they would dislike its author.

 

[Contumacious]

There is no such thing as "supremacy of the state" unless you are a fascist/socialist.

The historical information before them was that governments throughout the ages injured and killed their citizens.

When the fuck are you going to get schooled on that?!>!?!?!?

Calm down little man. I never brought up any "supremacy of the state". YOU did.

Bottom line is still that your ignorance of your own history got called out for what it is. Run along now, preferably in the direction of a history book.

MR. DINGLE BERRY , SIR:

IF THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT SUPREME THEN THE STATE IS.


RUN ALONG NOW, PREFERABLY TOWARDS A DEDUCTIVE LOGIC BOOK.

Your logical fallacy is:

False Dilemma.
And strawman too.

I know all this shit, Pinkie. Ask me anything.

MR. DINGLE BERRY , SIR:

IF THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT SUPREME THEN THE STATE IS.


RUN ALONG NOW, PREFERABLY TOWARDS A DEDUCTIVE LOGIC BOOK.

You appear to have many "supremacy" obsessions, Pinkie. Not sure what that means.

Your fallacy is: False Dilemma Repeated

(also known as: false dichotomy*, the either-or fallacy, either-or reasoning, fallacy of false choice, fallacy of false alternatives, black-and-white thinking, the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, bifurcation, excluded middle, no middle ground, polarization)

Description: When only two choices are presented yet more exist, or a spectrum of possible choices exists between two extremes. False dilemmas are usually characterized by “either this or that” language, but can also be characterized by omissions of choices.

Logical Form:

Either X or Y is true.


Example (two choices):

You are either with God, or against him.

Explanation: As Obi Wan Kenobi so eloquently puts it in Star Wars episode III, “Only a Sith deals in absolutes!” There are also those who simply don’t believe there is a God to be either with or against.
(also known as: false dichotomy*, the either-or fallacy, either-or reasoning, fallacy of false choice, fallacy of false alternatives, black-and-white thinking, the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, bifurcation, excluded middle, no middle ground, polarization)​

HUH?

THERE ARE ONLY TWO CHOICES


EITHER INDIVIDUALS HAVE THE POWER OR THE GOVERNMENT DOES.


WHAT'S THE OTHER CHOICE?

.


.

 

[Contumacious]

Fascist Republicans vs. Socialist Democrats

It is an absolute fact that no matter which of the two major parties in Washington,
D.C., is in power, the freedoms and liberties of the American people
continue to be eroded. However, this does NOT mean that there are
not basic differences between the two parties. The two parties differ
greatly on HOW government will take our liberties. Where they are
similar is in the fact that neither of them has any interest in
preserving liberty. Until the American people awaken to this reality,
whatever freedoms we have left in this country are doomed."


.

 

[bodecea]

This party has become no better than ISIS. I don't know why they just don't blow up the statues. show your true colors

You keep saying that, Ms American Spring.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Jefferson, who enslaved his own illegitimate children, has never been a hero of mine.

 

[Contumacious]

Jefferson, who enslaved his own illegitimate children, has never been a hero of mine.

HUGO CHAVEZ, AND HIS ILK, WHO ENSLAVED THE ENTIRE VENEZUELAN NATION , IS A HERO OF YOURS.

THE RESULT MISERY, EMPTY STORE SHELVES, SUFFERING, DEATH.

GO FUCK YOURSELF.


.

 

[hazlnut]

Democrats don't like Jefferson and Jackson anymore

August 12, 2015




Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson have long been claimed as early defining figures in the history of the Democratic Party, but they may soon slip off their pedestals: Four state branches of the DNC have already renamed their annual Jefferson-Jackson Dinner events to avoid now-unwanted historical associations, and at least five other state parties are considering doing the same

The decision "confirms that our party believes it is important to change the name of the dinner to align with the values of our modern-day Democratic Party: inclusiveness, diversity and equality," said Andy McGuire, chair of the Iowa Democratic Party, the latest group to make the switch. Both presidents owned slaves, and Jackson also backed the Indian Removal Act and the infamous Trail of Tears.


Well , it makes sense.

Thomas Jefferson supported a free Constitutional Republic

The modern day democrats are socialists/fascists/state supremacists - they support the gargantuan welfare/warfare police state. So they should align themselves with Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin. Hugo Vhavez, .

Another bonehead thread brought to you by Tea Party Taliban.